Social Contract 101- What you need to know to start learning about politics

Social contract theory informs the basis of our current societal structure and contextualizes our interpersonal relationships, political engagement, and interactions with the government and society at large. The Social Contract is valuable because it characterizes the main function of our current capitalist democracy. It is a rudimentary existential crisis and right of passage to wonder why we are allowed to do some things and not others, and the social contract allows for the answer to the first of those springs of whys. To that end, it provides perspective to break down the conventions of our culture and government. Knowing that the social contract allows for populations to choose between natural order and societal conventions, we can begin to see the mechanisms it sets up to allow us to pursue whatever freedoms we like. Happiness can only come from intellectual liberty, and that can only be awarded in situations wherein there is peace. In natural law, total liberty over everyone else means consistently worrying about your survival and imminent death. Within the social contract, a new kind of liberty is unlocked, the liberty allowed by political life and enlightenment through this new and heightened level of engagement.

Social contract theory begins and is predicated upon the idea that morality is an agreement, that we compromise in order to live in harmony with one another. It places compromise at the root of our interactions. In order to receive from others, we must give and therefore keep a balance between our relationships. However, within philosophy, this causes a multitude of issues. As argued by Glaucon in Plato’s Republic, we do right because we want to keep the balance between our relationships. However, the criticism of Glaucon’s argument is within the instrumental value of morality.¹ If morality’s only value is a means to your own ends, then it erases any consideration for engaging in good for the sake of good. This is also known as intrinsic value, and it is erased in these kinds of interactions. Social Contract theory at its heart, is about elevating the human experience away from the rudimentary ways we usually engage with life at large. It becomes a delicate balance between people that can be upset very quickly if not conducted properly.

Harmony and thriving political life as a moralistic ideal is the compass for social contract theory. Although the social contract does not give us an ethical standard to uphold, there is a harmony and safety standard that must be maintained. This is only further emphasized by the fact that a social contract is not something we must be subjected to. We can just as easily choose to leave the contract and regain our liberty. However, as Hobbes contends, no one would ever choose that because it would mean living in banishment and without being able to fulfill self-actualization. Popularized by Hobbes, social contract theory essentially begins with the theory of nature. The state of nature is the state we were originally conceived in, one wherein there is total liberty and freedom over not only ourselves but also the freedom to enact whatever we like onto other people. This freedom, however, means that we would constantly be in a state of danger. This state of danger meant that our lives would be limited in some way by the dangerous fear of total freedom’s cause. This danger was exacerbated by the lack of autonomy we had. Although we have the freedom to do as we like, the fear of danger will forever keep us from achieving our full potential. The state of self-actualization could not be achieved, therefore entrapping us within the state of nature, never to be elevated. The social contract enters when we decide to leave the state of nature. The social contract goes a step beyond that; it is not simply a form of instrumental value, it goes beyond the individual responsibility we have to ourselves. We give people in government power, and in return, they give us security. The social contract is especially important in the ways that it awards people the right to leave, which is what differentiates our current modern day from the true social contract. However, the implication brushes up against other ethical standards. Particularly, the Social contract theory does not specify any morals above another, nor does it set the standard for an ethical standard. Instead, the obligatory nature of the theory establishes that in order to receive political freedom and the liberty of peace, you must give away the liberty of nature.

The harmony of social contracts comes from a certain ethical obligation that is asserted through the construction of the system. To make systems that can treat people in line with justice and harmony, the social contract requires that you be removed from bias and prejudice in judging other people. The veil of ignorance is a kind of positionality you can take on that allows you to achieve neutrality in decision-making. You must make systems from a place of the veil of ignorance to create a system that can be widely applied. The founders of social contract theory had built each of their theories on those that came before, but not without each of their criticisms. Both the veil of ignorance and the original position were posed by John Rawls, who used the social contract to achieve political justice for the just distribution of liberty, opportunity, income, and wealth.²Rawls marries the ideas posed by Glaucon and embeds them with intrinsic value; humans intrinsically want to live in peace and feel that they’ve achieved a sense of justice. While mortality furthermore has generally been about upholding ascertain code, the social contract theory posed by Rawls surrounds fulfillment. Social contract theory also has a large emphasis on being the theory that is the most dedicated to marrying itself with capitalist democracy, meaning that many criticisms of capitalism could also be placed upon the philosophy of social contract. Karl Marx felt that class separation would put us all against each other in order to keep the profit cycle circling. Marx emphasizes the wave can achieve fulfillment through being Hobbes seems to engage with coke and modifies the social contract on the basis of Locke’s presentation. He believes that leaving the state of nature’s choice brought on by human propensity for a reason and therefore choosing to submit to the authority of a government or a king. He similarly lived in the right of God and His place within government. While people should be together and in conversation with each other, Rousseau's and hobbies make up the full idea of the social contract. Social contract theory takes on many different forms and versions. The evolution of social contract theory was contributed to by many different philosophers, the most prominent of which was John Locke, who informed my initial understanding of philosophy. John Locke was a part of the religious wave of philosophy. While many people at the time were beginning to question the fundamental right of kings as preordained by God, Locke doubled down on religious structure. Locke believed that each collective had to have a leader and that the government could similarly operate as a family sort of supervision.

The Social Contract essentially promotes the idea that morality is a continued fostering of community and protection of liberty and free thinking spaces. This aligns, but without rectifying these huge issues. Social contract theory is concerned with the political lives of people and wants citizens of any given society to operate within it. Morality within a social contract is about contributing to society through citizenship because, otherwise, we would be reduced to the creatures who lived in a state of nature initially. What separates them from us is their contribution to political life and all. The idea of the veil of ignorance is also not compatible with the ethics of gender and race that we learn about in later chapters. Specifically, although the veil of ignorance awards us with some sort of equality, it’s not likely that humans can operate without bias weighing or decisions in some way. It also demonizes bias, which is a natural part of our ability to reason. Furthermore, what it ends up doing is further hindering people who require equity to recoup from a lack of privilege awarded to them. It’s about removing biases and not tolerating them. It sets up the expectation for a system in which we don’t have systemic issues with the operation of our societies and their role in perpetuating bias. Social contact theory is important for understanding our system; however, this dangerously assumes that the systems we have are completely compatible. Today, we are stuck in many situations where in our governments have power that can to be swayed or revoked, and with each passing day, our liberties are being infringed upon, tipping the scale further and further toward the governments that are meant to protect us above all else. Social contract theory ultimately assumes people’s good faith endurance and especially within a late-stage capitalistic system, the greed incentive does not breed that goodwill. Social contract theory in practice and in its purest form is like many philosophies, ideal, and unlike other philosophies, realistic.

Social contract theory is incredibly important to be able to understand the world that we currently live in. because it is so closely aligned with our current world many of our criticisms of current governmental structures could be applied back to social contract theory itself. in a similar vein, because he is essentially setting an ideal for what a society should be if it were to run as planned, social contract theor,y like many others seem incredibly idealistic. This flexibility makes the theory incredibly intriguing as it is an all-encompassing one that isn’t interested in outlining exactly what actions people should take once within the social contract. This makes the social contract theory both flexible and viable,which is the mark of a good ethical structure.